That's because you do some cherry picking to make Apple look good.
Samsung actually makes a profit of around 100 billions per year. Apple makes a profit of a bit under 80 billions. Yes, Apple makes more per iPhone because they absurdly overcharge their customers, but they still make a lot less money than Samsung.
Now go ahead, and spin those numbers by made-up market segments to put Apple on the first place. That's what they've been doing for over 5 years now, although their market share keeps shrinking quarter after quarter, even though the smartphone market as a whole keeps growing.
The entirety of mankind's knowledge is at your fingertips
Wrong. I've done some seriously disturbing shit last weekend and I'll carry the secret to my grave; nobody will ever find out, even with the fastest internets, and I suspect this is not a unique event. This whole fingertips thing is overrated.
I don't know how old you are, but if your life has gotten to the point where you're bothered by the appearance of barely legal pornstars that are still too young to drink a beer but are old enough to get fucked on camera, maybe you need to take a long walk on the beach and reflect on things.
Their approach is better, for the following reasons:
1) it provides an extra income to employees with no major additional labor (i.e. win-win) 2) it keeps the costs low, which is a must when the business model is rock-bottom prices 3) a minimum wage delivery driver is unlikly to afford a reliable car so Walmart would have to acquire a fleet of vehicles or a fleet of drivers to mitigate the risk 4) having many employees in the delivery pool increases the odds of packages being delivered, as opposed to having a handful of drivers who tend to get sick or need vacations
Those Walmart people are scrappy and relentless, and this is one more example of that fascinating culture.
I'm glad for you if you have the luxury of choosing a more lucrative career, but for many people Walmart is the only option. That doesn't mean they are imbeciles.
And while the pay is low (which is part of the business model), there are things at Walmart that are better than other employers at a same pay scale. For instance, Walmart employees are less exposed to violent crime than employees of fast food chains or gas stations, and for anyone with real ambition and skills there's an actual path to better positions unlike exciting careers in sanitation or convenience store customer service. A vast majority of Walmart middle management comes from the ranks.
Wrong. Samsung is more profitable than Apple, even if they don't make a $400 profit per phone.
Next time you buy an iPhone, just think of that. 2/3 of the price tag goes straight in Apple's huge pile of cash, for no reason other than you accepting to be separated from your money. This whole process is called a wealth transfer from the idiots to the wealthy.
it still amazes me how fanbois are so proud of being ripped off by Apple, who overprice their phone so much that they make a $400 profit per device while other manufacturer make $20 on vastly superior hardware.
Most app devs are either suckers or they've got a customer who is a sucker.
Spot on. Apple Store app devs are for the most part Apple customers. Gartner usually releases a report every year about the business of selling apps, and last year their research indicated that less than 1% of non-free apps are profitable.
They used to say: Apple sells the most smartphones. Then it was: Apple users spend the most time per session. Then it was: Apple makes the most money per phone. Now they use app store numbers to claim success. What's next? Number of iPhones seen at Starbucks?
That's why I call it a safety blanket. In the current state of technology, it's dirty but coal can power the country. Wind and sunlight can't.
Well as with most things involving power, the issue is storage. If there was a cost-effective way to store electric power then it could be a different scenario. Unfortunately at the moment the storage solutions are not ready for massive production, so the power grid must be able to meet rush hour capacity, which makes slow, continuous sources somewhat marginal.
There's enough coal in the USA to power the country for a century.
And there's enough wind in the USA to power the country forever.
And enough sunlight and enough cosmic rays and whatnot. Now, why don't you show how to do it in a way that is profitable for people other than the turbine vendor?
They've done it time and again in various industries in other regions. Central America or Africa, for instance. Or last year they started sending military advisors to train soldiers in South America. Guess where those soldiers will get their equipment from. It always start with a kind gesture and ends up in customer lock-in.
That's the Chinese way. Maybe it's not as bad as the American way, which consists in bribing foreign officials - or replacing them with a puppet regime - and allowing them to reap huge personal rewards as they indenture their countries in huge loans for infrastructure projects based on overinflated estimates.
That's plain wrong. The challenge here is not "the infrastructure" - everyone can build a warehouse - it's the cost-effective business processes. That cannot be acquired from a fire sale.
30% of revenue from energy production is equal to maintenance costs? Over what period, unit lifetime?
Yes.
See:
Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs constitute a sizeable share of the total annual costs of a wind turbine. For a new turbine, O&M costs may easily make up 20-25 per cent of the total levelised cost per kWh produced over the lifetime of the turbine.
The maintenance cost for a turbine is about 30% of its energy production. Of that 30%, about 2/3 goes in parts and service. And this is just maintenance.
Coal is a fantastic safety blanket for energy. There's enough coal in the USA to power the country for a century. The problem is that currently, there's no way to do it in a manner that is both cost-effective and clean, so those turbines look like a good idea.
It's worrying however that a Chinese company is ready to establish a beach head in Wyoming for wind power. China spends *a lot* of money on green energy research, more than the rest of the world combined, but their country still relies heavily on coal and they hate it.
This looks like a classic Inkjet printer scam. Give away the thing that looks valuable, and then milk the locked-in customers.
It won't be much longer and Walmart is going to start kicking some Amazon ass with home delivery. Just watch.
Not going to happen. Home delivery requires huge upfront investments and offers razor-thin margins. Amazon was willing to sink billions in building their delivery pipeline; Walmart would never make that kind of gamble. It doesn't matter how many hubs or trucks they have; fulfilling individual orders is a very tedious process, it's completely different from shipping palettes upon palettes of the same shit. And it's even worse in the grocery business because food goes bad real quick. Losses losses losses.
The web began to have some kind of economical relevance around or after the first dot-com bubble. The first mainstream version of Windows came out in 1989. And already at the time Microsoft had done a lot to promote end-user computing (i.e. PC).
It's okay to dislike Windows but don't rewrite history, even if you feel the need to mention iPhones.
It's all in the article. Their previous system was split in 65 repos, but they wanted to have all Windows in the same repo to be in line with their new engineering strategy.
They had 3 problems: 1 - performance for cloning, which they fixed with that GVFS thing. 2 - git processing files that were not modified (they changed the way it works to improve that) 3 - slower and slower performance when many files are touched but not modified on the desktop (they also changed the way it works to improve that)
You don't like it, I get that, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. Every organization has different challenges and limitations, and whatever solution they find to solve their problems and sell their product is an achievement. This is not academia, this is real life with real dollars and real computers.
Slashdot Mirror
That's because you do some cherry picking to make Apple look good.
Samsung actually makes a profit of around 100 billions per year. Apple makes a profit of a bit under 80 billions. Yes, Apple makes more per iPhone because they absurdly overcharge their customers, but they still make a lot less money than Samsung.
Now go ahead, and spin those numbers by made-up market segments to put Apple on the first place. That's what they've been doing for over 5 years now, although their market share keeps shrinking quarter after quarter, even though the smartphone market as a whole keeps growing.
If you think conservatives are the best at selling out, you probably need to learn more about Bill and Hillary Clinton.
The entirety of mankind's knowledge is at your fingertips
Wrong. I've done some seriously disturbing shit last weekend and I'll carry the secret to my grave; nobody will ever find out, even with the fastest internets, and I suspect this is not a unique event. This whole fingertips thing is overrated.
I don't know how old you are, but if your life has gotten to the point where you're bothered by the appearance of barely legal pornstars that are still too young to drink a beer but are old enough to get fucked on camera, maybe you need to take a long walk on the beach and reflect on things.
Their approach is better, for the following reasons:
1) it provides an extra income to employees with no major additional labor (i.e. win-win)
2) it keeps the costs low, which is a must when the business model is rock-bottom prices
3) a minimum wage delivery driver is unlikly to afford a reliable car so Walmart would have to acquire a fleet of vehicles or a fleet of drivers to mitigate the risk
4) having many employees in the delivery pool increases the odds of packages being delivered, as opposed to having a handful of drivers who tend to get sick or need vacations
Those Walmart people are scrappy and relentless, and this is one more example of that fascinating culture.
I'm glad for you if you have the luxury of choosing a more lucrative career, but for many people Walmart is the only option. That doesn't mean they are imbeciles.
And while the pay is low (which is part of the business model), there are things at Walmart that are better than other employers at a same pay scale. For instance, Walmart employees are less exposed to violent crime than employees of fast food chains or gas stations, and for anyone with real ambition and skills there's an actual path to better positions unlike exciting careers in sanitation or convenience store customer service. A vast majority of Walmart middle management comes from the ranks.
Wrong. Samsung is more profitable than Apple, even if they don't make a $400 profit per phone.
Next time you buy an iPhone, just think of that. 2/3 of the price tag goes straight in Apple's huge pile of cash, for no reason other than you accepting to be separated from your money. This whole process is called a wealth transfer from the idiots to the wealthy.
it still amazes me how fanbois are so proud of being ripped off by Apple, who overprice their phone so much that they make a $400 profit per device while other manufacturer make $20 on vastly superior hardware.
Most app devs are either suckers or they've got a customer who is a sucker.
Spot on. Apple Store app devs are for the most part Apple customers. Gartner usually releases a report every year about the business of selling apps, and last year their research indicated that less than 1% of non-free apps are profitable.
the mass market is what won things for Apple.
By "won" you mean a 13% market share? Which is more or less where BBRY was a couple years ago.
They used to say: Apple sells the most smartphones. Then it was: Apple users spend the most time per session. Then it was: Apple makes the most money per phone. Now they use app store numbers to claim success. What's next? Number of iPhones seen at Starbucks?
No. Read the summary:
According to the FTC, more than $70 million in charges may be eligible for refunds on in-app purchases made between November 2011 and May 2016.
That's why I call it a safety blanket. In the current state of technology, it's dirty but coal can power the country. Wind and sunlight can't.
Well as with most things involving power, the issue is storage. If there was a cost-effective way to store electric power then it could be a different scenario. Unfortunately at the moment the storage solutions are not ready for massive production, so the power grid must be able to meet rush hour capacity, which makes slow, continuous sources somewhat marginal.
There's enough coal in the USA to power the country for a century.
And there's enough wind in the USA to power the country forever.
And enough sunlight and enough cosmic rays and whatnot. Now, why don't you show how to do it in a way that is profitable for people other than the turbine vendor?
They've done it time and again in various industries in other regions. Central America or Africa, for instance. Or last year they started sending military advisors to train soldiers in South America. Guess where those soldiers will get their equipment from. It always start with a kind gesture and ends up in customer lock-in.
That's the Chinese way. Maybe it's not as bad as the American way, which consists in bribing foreign officials - or replacing them with a puppet regime - and allowing them to reap huge personal rewards as they indenture their countries in huge loans for infrastructure projects based on overinflated estimates.
That's plain wrong. The challenge here is not "the infrastructure" - everyone can build a warehouse - it's the cost-effective business processes. That cannot be acquired from a fire sale.
30% of revenue from energy production is equal to maintenance costs? Over what period, unit lifetime?
Yes.
See:
Operation and maintenance (O&M) costs constitute a sizeable share of the total annual costs of a wind turbine. For a new turbine, O&M costs may easily make up 20-25 per cent of the total levelised cost per kWh produced over the lifetime of the turbine.
https://www.wind-energy-the-fa...
I was too high with 30%, I remembered that from a conference, but ball park.
The maintenance cost for a turbine is about 30% of its energy production. Of that 30%, about 2/3 goes in parts and service. And this is just maintenance.
Coal is a fantastic safety blanket for energy. There's enough coal in the USA to power the country for a century. The problem is that currently, there's no way to do it in a manner that is both cost-effective and clean, so those turbines look like a good idea.
It's worrying however that a Chinese company is ready to establish a beach head in Wyoming for wind power. China spends *a lot* of money on green energy research, more than the rest of the world combined, but their country still relies heavily on coal and they hate it.
This looks like a classic Inkjet printer scam. Give away the thing that looks valuable, and then milk the locked-in customers.
It's not just for their employees, they're offering this program to unemployed coal miners as well.
It won't be much longer and Walmart is going to start kicking some Amazon ass with home delivery. Just watch.
Not going to happen. Home delivery requires huge upfront investments and offers razor-thin margins. Amazon was willing to sink billions in building their delivery pipeline; Walmart would never make that kind of gamble. It doesn't matter how many hubs or trucks they have; fulfilling individual orders is a very tedious process, it's completely different from shipping palettes upon palettes of the same shit. And it's even worse in the grocery business because food goes bad real quick. Losses losses losses.
The web began to have some kind of economical relevance around or after the first dot-com bubble. The first mainstream version of Windows came out in 1989. And already at the time Microsoft had done a lot to promote end-user computing (i.e. PC).
It's okay to dislike Windows but don't rewrite history, even if you feel the need to mention iPhones.
It's all in the article. Their previous system was split in 65 repos, but they wanted to have all Windows in the same repo to be in line with their new engineering strategy.
They had 3 problems:
1 - performance for cloning, which they fixed with that GVFS thing.
2 - git processing files that were not modified (they changed the way it works to improve that)
3 - slower and slower performance when many files are touched but not modified on the desktop (they also changed the way it works to improve that)
It is a WTF in managing a product.
You don't like it, I get that, but that doesn't mean it's wrong. Every organization has different challenges and limitations, and whatever solution they find to solve their problems and sell their product is an achievement. This is not academia, this is real life with real dollars and real computers.
just looking/sounding good.
Were you in a coma during the last election?